U.S. Army Gen. Chris Donahue, according to the Wall Street Journal reporters Michael R. Gordon and Lara Seligman, is making an “abrupt departure” from his post as Army commander in Europe — which, they say, reflects Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s “broader push to shrink the number of generals and admirals by 10 percent overall.” Writing for the conservative website The Bulwark, retired Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling lays out some reasons why Donahue’s reported departure is so disruptive to the military.
Hertling, himself a former U.S. Army Europe commander, emphasizes that Donahue’s “early retirement” from his post is “about more than the departure of a single officer.”
“Donahue is not simply another general officer,” Hertling explains in The Bulwark. “Over the course of a career spanning more than 30 years, he served as a Ranger, a special operations commander, and a combat leader on multiple deployments before commanding the 82nd Airborne Division and XVIII Airborne Corps. Throughout that journey, he earned the trust and respect of soldiers.”
Hertling continues, “Military organizations are built on trust. Soldiers willingly follow leaders they believe are competent, committed, and authentic. Those qualities cannot be manufactured. They are earned through years of shared hardship, difficult decisions, and demonstrated character. Few senior officers have developed the reputation Donahue enjoys among the soldiers who have served under him.”
The former U.S. Army Commander notes that someone in that position has “enormous responsibility” and “oversees more than 40,000 soldiers, civilians, and Army professionals spread across an enormous geographic area.”
“Readiness is not a slogan,” Hertling writes. “It is a daily commitment involving training, leader development, maintenance, logistics, planning, and preparation for contingencies that may emerge with little warning. Yet readiness is only one part of the job. The commander also maintains relationships with the armies of 49 European nations and 54 African nations. That responsibility requires constant engagement with chiefs of defense, army commanders, ambassadors, ministers of defense, and heads of government.”
Hertling warns that Hegseth is being incredibly disruptive to the military.
“In this case,” the former U.S. Army Commander says, “Gen. Donahue’s departure does not occur in isolation, but is rather in combination with the removal of other capable senior officers. Secretary Hegseth has now overseen the removal or early retirement of more than two dozen senior officers across the armed forces…. The Army will endure. It always has. New leaders will emerge, responsibilities will be assumed, and the institution will continue its mission. But long after Hegseth has left his office, the echoes of his decisions and unexplained actions will still be reverberating in the leadership of the military.”
